The root of cause of disregard for a group of people is anonymity, which in turn is a consequence of large and dense groups of humans. Unknown "others" just aren't real.

We feel attracted to huge and dense cities/provinces/nations, and the result becomes more and more ugly. Aren't pandemics another consequence of those?

Hollywood glorifies what sells (attracts many). Many feel, more or less consciously, surrounded by the masses, threatened by it, and react thru nihilism/Machiavellianism/...

https://as.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu-as/politics/documents/Ari...

https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/how-does-media-influence-social-...

https://live.worldbank.org/should-we-use-entertainment-media...

Are you under the impression that humans led some kind of Edenic existence before we started watching movies?

“If it’s a great movie, it lets you understand a little bit more about what it’s like to be a different gender, a different race, a different age, a different economic class, a different nationality, a different profession, different hopes, aspirations, dreams and fears. It helps us to identify with the people who are sharing this journey with us.”

There is no monolithic “Hollywood.” Suggesting not only that there is but that it has a nefarious agenda of some kind is an all-too common element of popular conspiracy theories and, frankly, an example of lazy thinking.

My point is that in reality all sorts of people make all sorts of films, many of which are valuable sources of inspiration and comfort for their audiences.

And yet despite this you are quite obviously engaging in a definist fallacy by suggesting that only those films and shows that bother you personally are representative and thus the entire film industry can be rightfully condemned.